How Obama plays the pundits

When New York Times columnist David Brooks accused the White House last week of “shaking confidence with its hyperactivity,” no fewer than four senior administration officials reached out to explain — ever so politely — how he was wrong.

Overkill? Maybe. But it’s what journalists have come to expect from an administration that’s trying much harder than its predecessor did to influence inside-the-Beltway opinion makers.

Story Continued Below

President Barack Obama dined with conservative columnists at George Will’s house even before he took the oath of office, and he continues to work the refs now. After a 35-minute interview with the Times White House team last week, the president called back to quibble with a question he’d been asked and to elaborate on the answer he’d given.

The communications team for President George W. Bush would have been much more likely to let the initial response stand and then blast the Times after publication — all the better for fanning the passions of a political base deeply distrustful of the mainstream media.

Andrew Rosenthal, The Times’ editorial page editor, says the Obama White House has been more “proactive” than the Bush White House was, offering up policy thinkers to more fully explain the administration’s positions — both before and after columns and editorials run.

“I’ve had more unsolicited offers for participation from the Obama people in 45 days than in the last eight years from Bush,” said Rosenthal.

See Also

Rosenthal said the Obama administration’s approach is consistent with the one the Obama campaign used, and for a reason: It worked. Citing an example, he said that an Obama campaign aide succeeded in convincing him back in July — before an editorial ran — that Obama had not, in fact, reversed his position on a controversial D.C. handgun ban.

“With columnists and editorial writers,” Rosenthal said, “I think the theory is that you can actually have an impact.”

Washington Post editorial page editor Fred Hiatt said in an e-mail that the Obama team has been “open and responsive” to requests from The Post’s editorial writers. Hiatt said that helps The Post “produce smarter and more knowledgeable editorials.”

“My general view is, the more exchange of views, the better,” Hiatt added. “I welcome any outreach from the White House to my columnists or editorial board.”

Already, five of Hiatt’s writers have made it to one of the president’s meet-and-greets with columnists. E.J. Dionne has taken part in two — a gathering of predominantly liberal writers held at the transition office and, more recently, a smaller group discussion aboard Air Force One.

“I think whenever you can talk to the president about what he’s thinking — and when the president is a former professor who’s pretty good at speaking with small groups of people — it’s effective,” said Dionne.

Dionne, who admitted to being “broadly sympathetic” to Obama’s policies, met with Clinton when he was president but never had the opportunity to meet with Bush. “I was neither offended or surprised,” he said.

In an interview, Brooks said that Obama’s people respond quickly to columns with which they find fault — but that, in doing so, they refrain from “personal insults,” opting for a “very nice, very evidence-based” approach instead.

The Obama outreach effort is different than Bush’s in part because the previous administration “only reached out to people who automatically agreed with them.”

While conservative columnists were invited to the Bush White House, the Obama team has sat down with writers from across the ideological spectrum, among them syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer, Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, The Wall Street Journal’s Gerald Seib, The National Journal’s Ron Brownstein, The Times’ Frank Rich and MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.